What scares me the most is that the IDIOT (ugh) Tea Party people might actually try and vote as a block and support Sarah Palin. I think any Republican in their right mind (haha) wouldn't think twice about her for 2012, but these people who don't really know what they stand for, but know that Fox News tells it straight are going to kill the Republican party in 2012.

If the Repub's want to win in 2012, they will moderate themselves over the next two years, not stay near these crazy tea party people who really don't understand the ramifications of what they want (NO TAXES! LESS GOVERNMENT!! FREEDOM!).

Sarah Palin has succeeded in making her self look less qualified than she did in 2008, which I thought wasn't possible. She is now looking for ways to keep herself relevant and on people's minds, but this stick poking isn't going to work. I thought her Rush defense was laughable, but going after a cartoon comedy satire program is just hilarious. IDIOT.

A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams

Scenario

Opponents of the 2nd Bush, our current President, and our current VP all enjoy pot shots at things that are really not that significant, considering the scope of their positions. Examples would include GW Bush and Joe Biden both screwing up dates and times and words or right-wing nuts continually ranting about Barack Obama's "Hussien" name or missing birth certificate. This past week some folks hit hard on Mr. Biden for a reference to the wrong century.

BFD.

That said, overall I think our VP is not a big vote draw when folks pull the curtain and begin to create chads.....electing our next President.

Scenario: Because of Sarah Palin's popularity (I still think she can win, especially if the economy doesn't significantly turn around) the Obama administration quietly asks Mr. Biden to announce that he will only serve a single term. The Democratic Convention would then have some significant "interest" instead of a simple "here's our policies, coronate the king".

Scenario: Because of Sarah Palin's popularity (I still think she can win, especially if the economy doesn't significantly turn around) the Obama administration quietly asks Mr. Biden to announce that he will only serve a single term. The Democratic Convention would then have some significant "interest" instead of a simple "here's our policies, coronate the king".

In this scenario I would envision the VP candidate to be Ms. Clinton.

Bear

While I don't agree that Palin can win, I would actually give that scenario better than 50/50 odds of happening. People's perceptions of Clinton have improved over the last year, and it would invigorate the DNC and perhaps breathe a little life into an Obama reelection campaign in a potentially negative climate to be an incumbant.

"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

An interesting discussion that I just heard - several sates have adopted laws saying that if enough other states do likewise, that they will cast their EVs for whomever wins the nationwide popular vote - REGARDLESS of how their own state's voters voted.

A few thoughts that were brought up should this happen:

-'Flyover country' will become just that to the campaigns - all of those smaller states and markets will be completely ignored. As it stands now, things can get lively in places like North Dakota, Vermont and even here in Wisconsin - forcing the campaigns to pay attention to the Middle-Americans.

-Can you say "recount"?

-What if, let's say, in 2012, Sarah Palin wins 50.5% of the nationwide popular vote *BUT* BHO wins 65-70% of the popular vote in his home state of Illinois (a state that has already adopted that proposal). How likely will it really be that Illinois' heavily Democratic Electors will follow through with that and cast their ballots for Palin???

I don't like what is being talked about with the electoral votes, precisely because of the potential for it to discount less-populated states. Also, a change like this would require an amendment to the U.S. Constitution, in my opinion.

"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

What scares me the most is that the IDIOT (ugh) Tea Party people might actually try and vote as a block and support Sarah Palin. I think any Republican in their right mind (haha) wouldn't think twice about her for 2012, but these people who don't really know what they stand for, but know that Fox News tells it straight are going to kill the Republican party in 2012.
.

These people are so stupid and/or hate filled they don't realize that Obama has already cut their taxes more than Bush ever did.

An interesting discussion that I just heard - several sates have adopted laws saying that if enough other states do likewise, that they will cast their EVs for whomever wins the nationwide popular vote - REGARDLESS of how their own state's voters voted.

Mike

I know that some states have laws that invalidate the votes of "faithless electors", those who vote other than they have pladged to do so when nominated to serve as electors. The state law might require the electors to vote for the winners of the national popular vote, and consider any vote cast differently as invalid. Thus far, the Supreme Court has held that states can regulate electors fairly strictly, treating them as just functionaries with no real independent power, if they want to.

"Rarely do we find men who willingly engage in hard, solid thinking. There is an almost universal quest for easy answers and half-baked solutions. Nothing pains some people more than having to think."
Martin Luther King, Jr.

Switching places

Originally posted by Bear Up North

Opponents of the 2nd Bush, our current President, and our current VP all enjoy pot shots at things that are really not that significant, considering the scope of their positions. Examples would include GW Bush and Joe Biden both screwing up dates and times and words or right-wing nuts continually ranting about Barack Obama's "Hussien" name or missing birth certificate. This past week some folks hit hard on Mr. Biden for a reference to the wrong century.

BFD.

That said, overall I think our VP is not a big vote draw when folks pull the curtain and begin to create chads.....electing our next President.

Scenario: Because of Sarah Palin's popularity (I still think she can win, especially if the economy doesn't significantly turn around) the Obama administration quietly asks Mr. Biden to announce that he will only serve a single term. The Democratic Convention would then have some significant "interest" instead of a simple "here's our policies, coronate the king".

In this scenario I would envision the VP candidate to be Ms. Clinton.

Bear

The above scenario could happen, but i will give it another twist and say that Biden would step down as Vice President in favor of Ms. Clinton, but after the election he would be rewarded with the Secretary of State seat.

Palin has to distance herself from the Tea Party nut cases for her to have a ghost of a chance of winning the presendency. The northeast, is solidly Democratic and so is the west coast, and those folks aren't particularly interested in the right-wing nuts that have inhabitied the Tea Party at this time.

The fiscal conservatives whose ideas we should be listening to have been drowned out by radical fridge. Fiscal conservatism is not such a bad idea and the shrinking governement is also not such a bad idea ( keep us planners around).

I'm still in the Obama corner at this time, he hasn't done anything that would make me vote for someone else.

Even though this Bear still thinks Sarah Palin can win the presidency I must report that the latest polls indicate that 78% of voters do not think she has the ability to sit in the Oval Office. It has been a year since she resigned from her East Russia governorship and it seems obvious that she is doing the things that she thinks will convince voters that she has those prez abilities.

The Republican candidate is going to be Mitch Daniels. The forces are already coalescing around him.

It will be a brutal and ugly match between the two parties in 2010 because for the first time in a very long time we will be facing two candidates with very sharply opposing ideologies and governing approaches.

Obama may be the taller of the two, but my money is on Daniels because he will win the independents concerned about fiscal responsibility and the deficit.

Prediction: Newt Gingrich will soon announce his candidacy and will be the next President of the United States. Deal with it liberal nut jobs.

Not a chance in Hell Michigan. He has shown too many of his cards over the years. And anyone that goes on Sean Hannity consistently will not win.

Originally posted by PennPlanner

The Republican candidate is going to be Mitch Daniels. The forces are already coalescing around him.

It will be a brutal and ugly match between the two parties in 2010 because for the first time in a very long time we will be facing two candidates with very sharply opposing ideologies and governing approaches.

Obama may be the taller of the two, but my money is on Daniels because he will win the independents concerned about fiscal responsibility and the deficit.

I think this will be much more in line with what is going to happen. The R's will have to find someone that isn't a nut job (Palin, Newt, Paul) and is still a viable conservative. None of the big names are going to get it done. Although people don't like the D's right now, these Indies are not going to vote for a crazed person like Palin or Paul, or a crazy Ideologue like Newt. They are looking for fiscal conservatism and social moderation. I think Mitch Daniels could be a good candidate. Other than the privatization of the toll roads in Indiana, he has done a fairly decent job of fiscal issues. I think it will be the social issues that make the difference in 2012.

The R's are not taking advantage of all the junk the D's have messed up. 2012 will be about getting rid of "names" and dealing with ideas. Just watch as none of the big named R's who are trying to build a campaign will get the nomination.

A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams

What scares me the most is that the IDIOT (ugh) Tea Party people might actually try and vote as a block and support Sarah Palin. I think any Republican in their right mind (haha) wouldn't think twice about her for 2012, but these people who don't really know what they stand for, but know that Fox News tells it straight are going to kill the Republican party in 2012.

I don't get political because it's bad for stress levels but we had a local gentleman at a Tea Party rally that said he was not for government health care in any form yet he's on Medicare.

I don't see this as only hypocritical of the Tea Party but a sign for the future of politics in general. Someone who is obviously conservative doesn't want government programs but receives it himself - he'll never vote to stop Medicare. For those who do want government programs, once it's there it can never be retracted. No one will vote to shoot themselves in the foot financially. That is the problem in general, it all just piles on itself until it's too big for any of us to handle.

Prediction: Newt Gingrich will soon announce his candidacy and will be the next President of the United States. Deal with it liberal nut jobs.

Actually, I would like to see Newt run. I would love to see the knots conservative Christians tie themselves into trying to justify voting for him given his history. I would also like to see how he justifies his past behavior to my fellow Christians.

Between him and Sarah Palin, the entertainment value of the election would be pretty high. At least Sarah has tried to live out her convictions.

Actually, I would like to see Newt run. I would love to see the knots conservative Christians tie themselves into trying to justify voting for him given his history. I would also like to see how he justifies his past behavior to my fellow Christians.

Between him and Sarah Palin, the entertainment value of the election would be pretty high. At least Sarah has tried to live out her convictions.

I'm sure every American liberal would love that kind of race... one that's highly entertaining, provides good fodder for future elections, yet yields no threat to the current political balance of power.

I'm sure every American liberal would love that kind of race... one that's highly entertaining, provides good fodder for future elections, yet yields no threat to the current political balance of power.

Any political party/position/faction would like to be sitting in that kind of seat!

I can't deliver UTOPIA, but I can create a HELL for you to LIVE in :)DoD:(

To use a sports analogy, a big rivalry game really only counts for something when both teams involved are in the mix and competitive.

Kinda like Ohio State / Michigan lately. Pretty pointless. Honestly, the problem is with the R party. They are just in a tough place. Trying to differentiate themselves from the D's, without becoming more unreasonable then they already are. I don't really feel bad, as the Tea Party should have been cut off at the knees months ago by the R's and told that they will not accept uncivil / crazy people. They will be the party of fiscal responsibility and not of "no" or fringe right crazies. But they need the crazy right vote, so they continue on. They can't win that way.

A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams

Kinda like Ohio State / Michigan lately. Pretty pointless. Honestly, the problem is with the R party. They are just in a tough place. Trying to differentiate themselves from the D's, without becoming more unreasonable then they already are. I don't really feel bad, as the Tea Party should have been cut off at the knees months ago by the R's and told that they will not accept uncivil / crazy people. They will be the party of fiscal responsibility and not of "no" or fringe right crazies. But they need the crazy right vote, so they continue on. They can't win that way.

I think the problem is with both parties. R's are trying to differentiate themselves without seeming crazy, like you mentioned, and D's are trying to actually govern according to their professed principles with only modest success (in relation to their rhetoric), if even that. D's are also having trouble keeping themselves aligned in spirit, which makes their several successes somewhat muted despite Speaker Pelosi's and Senator Reid's abilities to get most of their colleagues to come around in time for votes. In the same way that R's need to find a way to be logical while still keeping the crazy right vote, D's need to find some way to either meet their rhetoric or tone it down as realities may dictate.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
C'mon and get me you twist of fate
I'm standing right here Mr. Destiny
If you want to talk well then I'll relate
If you don't so what cause you don't scare me

They got it backwards. Obama isn't a democratic socialist. He's a social democrat. That's like a gradual-pace, one-step-below philosophy on the evolution towards a socialist society - it still relies on a capitalist economy...

I think the problem is with both parties. R's are trying to differentiate themselves without seeming crazy, like you mentioned, and D's are trying to actually govern according to their professed principles with only modest success (in relation to their rhetoric), if even that. D's are also having trouble keeping themselves aligned in spirit, which makes their several successes somewhat muted despite Speaker Pelosi's and Senator Reid's abilities to get most of their colleagues to come around in time for votes. In the same way that R's need to find a way to be logical while still keeping the crazy right vote, D's need to find some way to either meet their rhetoric or tone it down as realities may dictate.

I agree with you completely. I am not saying that the D's don't have a ton of junk to fix, I was just commenting on the R's. The D's could screw up a one car parade.

A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams

They got it backwards. Obama isn't a democratic socialist. He's a social democrat. That's like a gradual-pace, one-step-below philosophy on the evolution towards a socialist society - it still relies on a capitalist economy...

The tea baggers got something backward?! No way...

Here is the problem the GOP has to understand. People like me, who would have had a tough time deciding between a McCain / AnyonewithatripledigitIQ ticket and Obama / Bideneventhoughhecanbeadork ticket are getting very weary of this nonsense. If you come with:

He's Hitler / Stalin / Antichrist

Where's the birth certificate

He caused the oil spill

He's Muslim

...tell it to someone else. Want to convince me? Let's discuss his inability to get real health care reform in place with a super majority in Congress. We can talk about still being in the middle east. How about some real financial reform... or campaign finance changes... or lobbying congress? Or, to put it in more simple terms, if you let those nut bags be in your party, I will not be joining you.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
C'mon and get me you twist of fate
I'm standing right here Mr. Destiny
If you want to talk well then I'll relate
If you don't so what cause you don't scare me